Group: Moderator
Post: 2,040 (563 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on May 11, 2015 15:45:09 GMT
Posted: May 11, 2015 15:45:09 GMT
I have just spotted that Kyocera has now withdrawn all its support for these cameras (as of 30 April) and indeed ALL Contax cameras (and Yashica cameras with a C/Y mount).
Unfortunately, to this end they have also removed the page on their website that housed the firmware upgrades for the Yashica Finecam SL300R and SL400R; the Contax TVS-D, i4R, SL300RT and u4R. This means that anyone buying one of these, unless they were among the last production models, will be stuck with Firmware 1.00; version 1.01 upgraded these cameras to accept up to 2Gb SD Cards (some to 4Gb) and improved write times and AF speed.
For anyone needing the Contax firmware for the TVS-D, SL300RT and i4R, I do have it as a zip file, though a lot of anti-virus software will block an email with a zip file attached.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,010 (77 liked)
Join date: January 2014
Status:
|
|
on May 13, 2015 0:04:02 GMT
Last Edit: May 13, 2015 0:08:06 GMT by ridgeblue99
Wow, I didn't even know most of those models existed. The TV-S is the only one I recognize. It's the state of the industry today. You can't afford to support older models when the institutional shareholders start screaming for their cut of the profits to increase. Lots of time folks don't even know the support exists, and don't use it, giving the company false stats as to how many really need it.
PF
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 29 (1 liked)
Join date: March 2015
Status:
|
|
on May 13, 2015 10:37:25 GMT
Last Edit: May 13, 2015 10:58:52 GMT by adrian2
At least the internet is full of websites that offer batteries for those models. Even with top-notch workmanship the image quality cannot match (on some) our today's phones camera. The evolution of digital cameras takes no prisoners
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 3 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2016
Status:
|
|
on Jan 12, 2016 17:48:44 GMT
Posted: Jan 12, 2016 17:48:44 GMT
I've firmware 1.01 for Contax u4R, which is a redesigned version of Kyocera Finecam SL400R. s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=03636244294675891181Could you please upload or send me the firmware for Contax SL300RT ? I've not managed to find some working download-location for the Kyocera Finecam SL300R firmware 1.05. But you can update it with the SL300RT firmware as well, which can be read about in Steve's digicams forum. forums.steves-digicams.com/kyocera-yashica/48723-sl300r-fun-firmware.htmlI had a SL300R before I bought the Contax u4R and later the SL400R. To me the SL400R is the best of these cameras as it uses less noise reduction than SL300R and u4R. The u4R have a different, thicker, battery which is rated 1100 mAh compared to 780 for the others. So obviously the battery life is a little better and the screen is larger. The SL300R/SL400R is no problem though. Some not very good things with u4R is that it can't save the exposure compensation to next time you turn on the camera, no Lcd light off, unlike SL300R and SL400R you can't set the aperture manually to 2.8 or 7.5. They've also moved the mode-switch to the left side of the camera which makes it somewhat awkward to use as you need to use both hands which switching to review-mode or video. The video quality is actually pretty good for being such an old camera and better than the Kyocera SL300R and SL400R Generally jpeg quality, u4R often have better colors and clarity but the occasional grey look which seems to be down the the NR and also the NR can ruin fine-details unlike the SL400R. I found the the u4R to be a somewhat mixed and crippled bag after first having used the SL300R. As far as I know there has not been a firmware update for the SL400R. But there is no need to fix anything there anyway.
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,040 (563 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Jan 13, 2016 0:58:25 GMT
Posted: Jan 13, 2016 0:58:25 GMT
Hi schaki and welcome to the Forum!
It's very annoying that Kyocera took down the driver and firmware updates last March.
The firmware update for the SL300RT is attached in Zip format; the method for updating is the same as for the i4R and probably the u4R. Please note that there never was a version 1.05 for the SL300RT - the last firmware version was 1.01 which is what the .exe file in the Zip will create. However, if you have a late numbered SL300RT, it should already be loaded with version 1.01. PLEASE remember that updating old firmware always carries a potential risk as data can become corrupted - if your camera is working OK, it may be better to leave it as it is.
CXSL300RUP 2.zip (752.23 KB)
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 3 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2016
Status:
|
|
on Jan 18, 2016 23:31:55 GMT
Posted: Jan 18, 2016 23:31:55 GMT
|
|
Group: Member
Post: 3 (0 liked)
Join date: January 2016
Status:
|
|
on Jan 19, 2016 9:21:30 GMT
Posted: Jan 19, 2016 9:21:30 GMT
Wow, I didn't even know most of those models existed. The TV-S is the only one I recognize. It's the state of the industry today. You can't afford to support older models when the institutional shareholders start screaming for their cut of the profits to increase. Lots of time folks don't even know the support exists, and don't use it, giving the company false stats as to how many really need it. PF If you would be looking to buy one of these I would say that i4R and Contax TVS Digital is the ones to go for in first place. Both have excellent lenses even though the i4R is somewhat let down by the in camera noise reductions which occasionally throws out a grey looking color-cast over the pictures. Same for the u4R, which surely is a different camera despite the similar name. Basically these two have the same jpeg-engine, unlike the somewhat older but also better TVSD. The TVSD have 5mp 1/1.8" ccd compared to 4mp 1/2.7" in i4R and u4R. None of them are bad when it comes to the user interface but the TVSD is the most intuitive of them followed by the i4R. All of them have a somewhat quirky, almost confusing playback/reviewmode until I got used to how it works. The Contax The SL300R T is basically a Kyocera Finecam SL300R with slightly different firmware, to image parameters and also NR as far as i can see among the sample images at steve's digicams, of these which can be compared directly. While I still had a SL300R I used it both with the Kyo-firmware and flashed with the SL300R T firmware. Kyocera SL300R steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/kyocera/finecam-sl300r/kyocera-finecam-sl300r-review-7.htmlContax SL300R T steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/contax/sl300r-t/contax-sl300r-t-review-7.htmlThe Kyocera SL400R is as the name suggest a 4mp vesion of the SL300R. Imo better than the previous two as it uses least NR. I prefer the SL400R over the u4R due to this and some other differences mentioned in a earlier post in this thread. Also, the lcd is smaller but have somewhat better viewing-angles than u4R. The only to me which is going directly for u4R is the better battery and the for the time very good video mode which the SL400R not really can match. If i was to choose one of these four very similar cameras it would be the SL400R followed by the u4R. But it is the TVSD and i4R which have no direct Kyocera equivalents. The first Kyocera Finecam S5 have a a very similar, though not same lens as the TVSD and similar image quality as the jpeg engine in TVSD is based on the S5's. TVSD however have a better, more intuitive interface. I'm looking to add a S5 mostly out of curiousity to make more straight comparison. But the sample images from S5 and TVSD looks similar indeed which support Kyocera's claim about the jpeg engine.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,010 (77 liked)
Join date: January 2014
Status:
|
|
on Jan 20, 2016 2:16:06 GMT
Posted: Jan 20, 2016 2:16:06 GMT
Thanks for the info, Schaki. I'm not looking to buy into the Yashica/Contax digital system, but some other members could find it useful.
PF
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,040 (563 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Aug 3, 2016 16:23:14 GMT
Last Edit: Aug 4, 2016 23:44:59 GMT by biggles3
Just a quick update and a small correction. I have today received a Kyocera SL400R camera from the USA and for those few Forum members that take an interest in the Contax & Yashica/Kyocera digicams that ceased production in 2005, I will attempt a comparison of its quality against that of the Contax SL300RT*. The SL400R has a 4Mp sensor compared with the 3Mp one on the SL300RT* so it should be able to resolve more detail but the images are reputed to lack the contrast of the Contax. Time will tell...
schaki is not quite right in suggesting that the Kyocera SL300R is essentially the same as the Contax of similar name. The Contax has Zeiss glass (though of near identical optical formula) with it's T* coating unlike the Kyocera and also has a detachable lens hood with a filter adapter which was eventually adopted by Kyocera on their SL400R though without the provision of the adapter. The 1.01 firmware update for the SL300RT was produced for the silver version of the Contax camera but could also be used in the Yashica/Kyocera SL300R as it basically enhanced the range of SD card compatibilities and speeded up the RTUNE image processor. However, it also speeded up the S-AF in the Contax but not in the Kyocera. The rare black versions of the Contax were nearly all released with Firmware 1.01 installed.
When it stops raining, I'll take some piccies with the SL400R and SL300RT* and upload them.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,010 (77 liked)
Join date: January 2014
Status:
|
|
on Aug 4, 2016 0:59:04 GMT
Posted: Aug 4, 2016 0:59:04 GMT
We'll be waiting for the results.
PF
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,040 (563 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Aug 5, 2016 13:10:35 GMT
Posted: Aug 5, 2016 13:10:35 GMT
Well, the weather relented so I grabbed a couple of photos. Because of the 3 image limit per message, I'll run these across two uploads with the overall images first and the crops to follow.
I'll post the 4Mp Kyocera SL400R photo first in each case, with the 3Mp Contax SL300RT* below.
I apologise for the date code on the Contax' piccie - I forgot to change it from the original factory date.
Both photos show sufficient detail for an A4 print although the colour rendering and contrast level produced by the Contax is more accurate than the Kyocera. The surprise given the later and larger sensor of the SL400R come sin the next images.
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,040 (563 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Aug 5, 2016 13:21:22 GMT
Posted: Aug 5, 2016 13:21:22 GMT
Here are the crops (original size) showing shadow detail...
Kyocera SL400R
Contax SL300RT*
What jumps out is the greater noise level produced by the larger sensor. Although White Balance was corrected in both cameras, the colours and contrast produced by the Contax appear superior to the Kyocera's which may be attributable to the Vario-Sonnar T* lens with its coatings. Although current digital technology has left these cameras far behind, for a simple snap & shoot that can slide into a pocket, they are both perfectly adequate, especially for web reproduction. Both cameras produce delightful video.
I will also grab an image with the Contax i4R - the brilliantly designed super-small 4Mp with the tiny Tessar T* lens...
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,040 (563 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Aug 5, 2016 15:33:56 GMT
Last Edit: Aug 5, 2016 15:40:23 GMT by biggles3
Just for the sake of completeness, here are 2 images of the same scene taken by the Contax i4R - probably my favourite little digital camera...
Interestingly, this 4Mp sensor is supposed to be identical to the one in the Kyocera SL400R. Although this image shows more noise than for the Contax SL300RT*, it exhibits less than for the Kyocera and once again, colour and contrast are better. It suggests that the Contax cameras, in addition to the benefits of Zeiss glass and T* coatings, may have used a slightly different processing algorithm as noise is not a function of the lens.
Although film is my preferred medium, I do have a lot of fun with digital - especially these lovely Contax cameras:
The eagle-eyed will have spotted that I don't have any u4R cameras; that's because almost every review placed them as inferior in image quality to the SL300RT*. If I find one some day that is cheap enough, I will grab it if only to see if they deserve their slightly tarnished reputation. The same applies to the Kyocera SL300R... But I'm in no rush...first, a graphite TVS-D!
Returning to the topic of this series of messages, all these cameras have had their firmware updated, except the Kyocera as it never got one from its manufacturer. It was released slightly late but that gave Kyocera time to incorporate all their updates into the model; sadly, there were updates planned to allow the use of larger cards (up to 4Gb) which were becoming more common but they never materialised. All digital efforts had been placed behind the ill-fated Contax N1-D and the rest, as we know, is history.
|
|
Group: Administrator
Post: 1,010 (77 liked)
Join date: January 2014
Status:
|
|
on Aug 6, 2016 1:38:35 GMT
Posted: Aug 6, 2016 1:38:35 GMT
You can see a lot of image smearing in the far roof line on the first two cameras.
PF
|
|
Group: Moderator
Post: 2,040 (563 liked)
Join date: April 2014
Status: Long, long time Contax and Yashica user; glad to be here and hope to contribute.
|
|
on Aug 6, 2016 12:31:13 GMT
Last Edit: Aug 6, 2016 21:41:54 GMT by biggles3
You can see a lot of image smearing in the far roof line on the first two cameras. PF Yes - it's always going to be a problem with low resolution sensors trying to resolve areas of fairly low contrast. I left the in-camera settings at 'Normal' rather than sharpening the recorded image and could probably have seriously enhanced the image in post-processing but that wouldn't help the true comparison.
I took a similar photo with the TVS-Digital and then an Olympus E-620 with 18-180 Zuiko followed by an Olympus E-M1 with mZuiko 12-40 2.8 lens and the level of detail and crispness improved with the sensitivity and pixel count of each of the sensors; given that all those lenses are pretty good performers, I suspect the differences are almost certainly down to the sensitivity and resolution of the sensors.
I'm tempted to take the Contax 645 with the 528C back and repeat the exercise but that would be grossly unfair as in 4 shot mode, the image file size would be 88Mb!
Anyhow, enough of digital! I'm off to play with my repaired RTSIII, its NPC Forscher back, 5 boxes of Fuji instant film and a gaggle of Zeiss lenses....
|
|